United States v.
George W. Bush et al is a new book that portrays the hypothetical account of
grand jury proceedings against President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard Cheney,
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and former
Secretary of State Colin Powell for  tricking the nation into war  in
legal terms, conspiracy to defraud the United States. The book was released early
December of 2006 and written by Ms. Elizabeth de la Vega
who retired in 2004 after 20 years as federal prosecutor and whose work included being

an Assistant U.
S. Attorney in Minneapolis, a member of the Organized Crime Strike Force in San Jose, and
Chief of the San Jose Branch U.S. Attorney's Office, I prosecuted all manner of criminal
cases. There were bank embezzlements, government frauds, violent takeover robberies,
piloting a commercial passenger flight while under the influence  the pilot had had
twenty rum and (diet) Cokes and four hours' sleep before takeoff  and investment
frauds, to name a few.

Tom Engelhardt and Ms. de la Vega recently posted a two-part preview
of this book along with some book excerpts, which can be found here (part 1) and here (part 2). These two
articles give such substantial explanation that felony crimes have been committed as to
make reading the book all but superfluous. An excerpt from part 1 follows:

After analyzing this evidence in light of the applicable law,
I've determined that we already have more than enough information to allow a reasonable
person to conclude that the President conducted a wide-ranging effort to deceive the
American people and Congress into supporting a war against Iraq. In other words, in legal
terms, there is probable cause to believe that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, and Powell
violated Title 18, United States Code, Section 371, which prohibits conspiracies to
defraud the United States. Probable cause is the standard of proof required for a grand
jury to return an indictment. Consequently, we have more than sufficient evidence to
warrant indictment of the President and his advisers.

Do I expect someone to promptly indict the President and his aides?
No. I am aware of the political impediments and constitutional issues relating to
the indictment of a sitting president. Do those impediments make this merely an
empty exercise? Absolutely not.

Numerous questions arise out of the last paragraph. If the President
and his aides have committed crimes, then what prevents any other federal prosecutor from impaneling a grand jury to consider placing him under indictment? Is
Ms. de la Vega the only federal prosecutor in the America that understands the law and the
rest are clueless? Is there any constitutional provision, law or statute that places
GWBush technically above the law? So if her book is not an empty exercise, what
options or obligations does Ms. de la Vega have as past federal prosecutor and still being
a licensed attorney?

Consider these excerpts from her three stated goals for the book.

1. Did the President and his team defraud the country?
After swearing to uphold the law of the land, did our highest government officials employ
the universal techniques of fraudsters  deliberate concealment, misrepresentations,
false pretenses, half-truths  to deceive Congress and the American people?

2. By presenting the President's conspiracy to defraud
just as a prosecutor would present any fraud conspiracy, I hope to enable readers to
consider the case in an uncharged atmosphere, applying criminal law to the evidence that
they believe has been proved to the standard of probable cause, just as grand jurors would
in any other case.

3. My third goal is to send the message home  to whomever will listen. And
this is it: The President has committed fraud. It is a crime in the
legal, not merely the colloquial, sense. It is far worse than Enron. It is
not a victimless crime. We cannot shrug our shoulders and walk away.

Assuming the evermore-obvious fascist/socialist intentions on destroying the Bill of
Rights and Constitution can be avoided, future Americans may well view Ms. de la Vega as a
solitary voice and hero from the legal community. There are tens of thousands of
knowledgeable but silent prosecuting attorneys, judges and elected officials that
understand this criminal reality just as she does. Ms. de la Vega states (in part 1) that the
risk of losing their jobs has rendered these officials mute. Their silence to the crimes
of GWBush equates to having sold out the rule of law and the Constitution for money.

However, publishing this book has correspondingly created a serious legal obligation for
Ms. de la Vega. All attorneys are officers of the Court. They take an oath of office just
like any elected official. They are all obligated to uphold and protect the Constitution.

UNITED STATES CODE - TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL
PROCEDURE, PART I  CRIMES, CHAPTER 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 4. Misprision of felony

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of
the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some
judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be
fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

As an officer of the Court, Ms. de la Vega must communicate what she understands about
GWBush et al to a court of proper jurisdiction in the form of a sworn statement or
affidavit. Her experience and knowledge undeniably compels her to distill her book into a
formal federal criminal complaint and have it served upon a competent court. If not then
she has subjected herself to willful misprision, a felony.

Upon submitting her federal criminal complaint, Ms. de la Vega has met her fiduciary
obligation to We the People and the Constitution. The responsibility for continuing
against GWBush et al has shifted to the Judge who was served, the local office of the US
Attorney and/or the State Attorney General in which it is filed. These recipients are then
faced with serious legal ramifications if they do not investigate the charges in Ms. de la
Vegas affidavit. Ignoring or failing to submit her allegations to a grand jury will
arguably subject any of these recipients to criminal exposure for misprision, conspiracy
to defraud the UNITED STATES by intentional inaction, aiding and abetting a criminal
enterprise, obstruction of justice and other possible crimes.

So then, is GWBush immune from prosecution for his actions as President or in his personal
capacity while he is President? No. Judges, Congressmen, Mayors, Senators and all manner
of elected officials can and do get hauled off in handcuffs for crimes they have
committed. There is no portion of the Constitution that immunizes the President from
criminal prosecution. Article 1, Section 3 (the Powers of the Congress) states as follows:

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to
removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or
Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and
subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Impeachment is only a
political act with limited consequences that bear ones ability to retain or hold
elected office. The convicted Party (such as the President or Judge or Congressperson) of
an Impeachment is still liable and subject to Indictment and prosecution for
any criminal acts according to Law.

There is no language in the
Constitution or the US Code that requires an impeachment proceeding to come before a
criminal indictment or prosecution. Any Constitutional Scholar, retired Assistant US
Attorney, Supreme Court Justice, Attorney General, Congressperson or any Court stating
such prior constraint is in violation of the Constitution and the Law. No one is above the
law, not even the President. The Constitution cannot be altered by statute, a legislative
act, a bill passed by Congress and signed by the President or an Executive Order. A valid
Article V procedure must be accomplished before the Constitution is lawfully
modified.

UNITED STATES CODE - TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART I
 CRIMES, CHAPTER 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 2. Principals

(a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels,
commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.
(b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or
another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.

After Ms. de la Vega has taken up her responsibility by filing her
criminal complaint, she has other serious crimes to attest and allege against the
President and others. These perpetrators have confessed to these crimes by their public
actions. Just prior to the November 2006 election cycle, Congress passed and the President
signed the Military Commissions Act of 2006.

One aspect of this supposed Act of Congress retroactively
holds people criminally liable for certain actions that happened before the bill was
passed by Congress and signed by GWBush. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 is a direct
violation of the Constitution,
Article I, Section 9, and Paragraph 3, is constitutionally null and void and of no
force and effect.

A challenge to any and all attorneys, including retired Assistant US
Attorneys ... please explain why the members of Congress who voted for the Military
Commissions Act of 2006 and the President who signed it supposedly into law are not guilty
of rebellion or sedition and other related crimes?

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any
rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof,
or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more
than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United
States.

The Military Commission Act of 2006 has been veiled in the appearance
of law when in fact it is a criminal act. The presentation of an invalid, unlawful act as
being a valid law is known as acting under the color of law. It is a gross and intentional
misrepresentation that is not law but tyranny. It is a serious enough violation of the
rights of the people that the potential consequences include capital punishment.

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance,
regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory,
Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or
immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to
different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or
by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall
be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily
injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts
include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or
fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and
if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts
include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to
commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or
imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or
intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in
the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the
Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same;
or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with
intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so
secured

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and
if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts
include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to
commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to
death.

Ms de la Vega also adds to
her responsibilities to We the People by making additional assertions in a bold and
accurate statement found in part 1.

George W. Bush exploited the vulnerability of an
entire populace reeling from the September 11, 2001, attacks to manipulate them into
supporting a war based on false pretenses.

The President has in all
likelihood committed War Crimes under USC Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 18, Section 2441 for
his Iraq War. If she truly believes her above statement, then she must attest and affirm
to these criminal actions of GWBush et al in another criminal complaint.

There is
one last question to Ms. de la Vega. If GWBush were monstrous enough to use the 911
attacks as a false pretense to commit war crimes against Iraq, then why would it be
unreasonable to consider the 911 attacks as a false flag action perpetrated by internal
terrorists? The resultant blood rage of the people could then be manipulated into a war
footing against Iraq.

(45) One of the lawyers said to Him in reply, "Teacher, when You say this, You
insult us too."
(46) But He said, "Woe to you lawyers as well! For you weigh men down with burdens
hard to bear, while you yourselves will not even touch the burdens with one of your
fingers.

Ephesians 5:11-13 NASB

(11) Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose
them;
(12) for it is disgraceful even to speak of the things which are done by them in secret.
(13) But all things become visible when they are exposed by the light, for everything that
becomes visible is light.

Nathanael is a self-employed engineer
and lives in metropolitan area of Dallas, Texas. He had only ever been a life long
registered Republican but changed to the Constitution Party in May of 2004. He is a
regular columnist for Ether Zone.